Terracotta vs. JBoss – The Numbers
May 5, 2007 | In: General Discussions
Interested post over on the Terracotta blog (actual pdf available here) concerning performance between Terracotta’s caching mechanism and the JBoss TreeCache.
If you’re in a situation where scalability (and reliability) are a chief concern, you should definitely check the open source Terracotta offering out.
Even if you don’t necessarily live in a high-throughput environment, the paper does present an interesting argument towards moving clustering from the application to the JVM.
One of the problems we commonly face at work (w/ a thick client/j2ee server application) involves the synchronization of different client states and data (ClientA changes data, ClientB, ClientC, ClientD may need to know about it). I’ve yet to really work on a project that has required scalability to the extent that Terracotta (or even JBoss TreeCache) would provide but I have come to realize the significant performance problems associated with shipping (and responding to) high-volume synchronization messages across the wire.
Might just have to play a bit more with Terracotta during our next Hack Day.
If you’re attending JavaOne this year, there’s a couple Terracotta clustering clinics planned.
1 Response to Terracotta vs. JBoss – The Numbers
cs
December 21st, 2009 at 3:59 am
Be VERY careful with terracotta.
In our experience of using it:
– it’s poorly supported (the responses on the forum are misty and often confusing, you will often get no direct (or even any) answer to your direct question)
– it’s unstable sometimes (http://forums.terracotta.org/forums/posts/list/2801.page)
– if you need real-world scalability you have to BUY FX edition (again http://forums.terracotta.org/forums/posts/list/2801.page)
No argue, the framework is powerful. But be ready to PAY for it.